Summary
holding that, "in the interest of justice," to the extent that it raised new claims, the court would construe pro se plaintiff's opposition to the motion to dismiss as an amendment to plaintiff's initial pleading (citing Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972); Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978))
Summary of this case from Jones v. Nationwide Advantage Mortg. Co.Opinion
Civil Action No. 7:07-cv-00455.
September 26, 2008
FINAL ORDER
In accordance with the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby
ADJUDGED AND ORDERED
as follows: GRANTED DENIED 31 DISMISSED 28 U.S.C. § 2244 GRANTED habeas corpus 28 U.S.C. § 2254 DISMISSED
1. Petitioner's motion to expand the record (Dkt. 37), seeking to add to the record the exhibits he has submitted to the court, is ; 2. Petitioner's other pending motions regarding appointment of counsel, financial assistance, discovery, appointment of an expert, and an evidentiary hearing, as discussed in the memorandum opinion, are ; 3. Claims first raised in petitioner's response (Dkt. No. 33) to defendant's motion to dismiss are hereby as untimely amendments, pursuant to (d)(1), as detailed in the memorandum opinion; 4. Respondent's motion to dismiss is hereby ; the petition for , pursuant to , shall be and hereby is ; and the action is hereby stricken from the active docket of the court. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this final order and the accompanying memorandum opinion to petitioner and to counsel of record for the respondent.